Classics and the Western Canon discussion

We will be starting our discussion on War and Peace August 21--in just one week. Here are some preliminary links and notes that may be of help to you. Feel free to add your own thoughts and sources. No spoilers, though!

War and Peace translations:

http://frisbeebookjournal.wordpress.c...

http://ospidillo-blog.blogspot.com/20...

http://www.newyorker.com/archive/2005...

http://www.nybooks.com/articles/archi...

http://www.librarything.com/topic/49150

http://www.ameliaatlas.com/?p=344

Ad copy for Briggs translation:

War and Peace is a novel by the Russian author Leo Tolstoy, published in 1869. The work is epic in scale and a well-known work of fiction. It is regarded as Tolstoy's finest literary achievement. War and Peace delineates in graphic detail events leading up to the French invasion of Russia, and the impact of the Napoleonic era on Tsarist society, as seen through the eyes of five Russian aristocratic families.

Synopsis:
At a glittering society party in St Petersburg in 1805, conversations are dominated by the prospect of war. Terror swiftly engulfs the country as Napoleon’s army marches on Russia, and the lives of three young people are changed forever. The stories of quixotic Pierre, cynical Andrey and impetuous Natasha interweave with a huge cast, from aristocrats and peasants, to soldiers and Napoleon himself.

In War and Peace (1868-9), Tolstoy entwines grand themes - conflict and love, birth and death, free will and fate - with unforgettable scenes of nineteenth-century Russia, to create a magnificent epic of human life in all its imperfection and grandeur.

Considered by many to be the greatest novel ever written, Tolstoy's masterpiece is a story of family life set against the backdrop of war. The novel begins in 1805 in the crowded and gossip-filled rooms of a St Petersburg party and follows the fortunes of the aristocratic Bolkonsky and Rostov families as Napoleon's armies sweep through Europe, culminating in the French invasion of Russia in 1812 and Napoleon's defeat. Tolstoy's vast novel takes in both the epic sweep of national events and the private experience of individuals, from the keen young soldier to Napoleon himself, and at the heart of it all the complicated triangle of affection that binds his central characters.

Often called the greatest novel ever written, War and Peace is at once an epic of the Napoleonic Wars, a philosophical study, and a celebration of the Russian spirit. Tolstoy's genius is seen clearly in the multitude of fully realized and equally memorable characters that populate this massive chronicle. Out of this complex narrative emerges a profound examination of the individual's place in the historical process, one that makes it clear why Thomas Mann praised Tolstoy for his Homeric powers and placed War and Peace in the same category as the Iliad: "To read him . . . is to find one's way home . . . to everything within us that is fundamental and sane."
http://www.homeshop18.com/war-peace/a...

"There remains the greatest of all novelists--for what else can we call the author of War and Peace?"
--Virginia Woolf

Characters in order of introduction:

http://galileo.stmarys-ca.edu/integra...

I am reading (listening to) the translation by the Maudes. I have enjoyed their translation and Constance Garnett's translation many times since I was a teenager. I have the Pevear/Volokhonsky translation as well, but I have not read very far into it. Whichever translation you choose, I hope you just relax and thoroughly enjoy the book. Don't worry if you can't keep all the people straight right away. As in real life, it takes time getting to know them. As you read part one you will attend many parties and other social events, and you will get to know people and remember their names as you go along. The last link that I posted above, "Characters in order of introduction," is a treasure.

I think the 1965 Soviet/Russian film directed by Sergei Bondarchuk is the best screen version. It's available on Mosfilm's YouTube channel, but without English subtitle unfortunately.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W4EcRS...

Nemo wrote: "I think the 1965 Soviet/Russian film directed by Sergei Bondarchuk is the best screen version. It's available on Mosfilm's YouTube channel, but without English subtitle unfortunately.

http://www.y..."

I agree, Nemo. It is marvelous.

Nemo wrote: "I think the 1965 Soviet/Russian film directed by Sergei Bondarchuk is the best screen version. It's available on Mosfilm's YouTube channel, but without English subtitle unfortunately.

http://www.y..."

Is it available on DVD with English subtitles?

Patrice wrote: "Yes. I bought it through Amazon for about $70. Money well spent, it's a masterpiece. The Soviet Union gave Bondarchuk the army to play with. War and Peace is the greatest book I've read and I b..."

Thanks. I was able to find and request it on Interlibrary Loan.

There are two DVD editions of the film.

One made in the US with English subtitles:
http://www.amazon.com/War-Peace-Lyudm...

The other made in Russia with English, French and Russian subtitles:
http://www.amazon.com/Sergei-Bondarch...

Click here for feature comparison.

I will be reading my old Modern Library edition, which I've been toting along, unread, with the rest of my life for almost fifty years now.

Of course that means Garnett's translation. I was feeling defensive about this until I examined the links in the excellent post #1. I was quite happy to find the first two links endorsed Garnett's translation as their own preference.

Anyone who's looked into this knows the spite with which Nabokov holds Garnett's work. His attitude I believe is vitiated by the fact that his own "word-for-word" translations of some of the Russian classics (so it is said at any rate) are rather wooden and not very appealing to many readers.

In my opinion, the comment that was made in one of the links that Garnett should be avoided by "students" (ie, by those who are particularly interested in studying the writing style of a Russian writer) is probably fair advice. It certainly doesn't apply to my interest in reading the book.

I hope to be able to keep up with the reading schedule (which I haven't seen yet), but am doubtful that I'll be contributing much to the discussion. I have always been a reader of fiction for pleasure, hence am in no way qualified to make comments such as I have seen in many GoodReads discussions about literary aspects of a work of fiction.

Oh, and thanks, Laurele, for that wonderful link to the character summary. I've copied it into a Word doc and will print it out and stick it inside the book.

Patrice wrote: "Yes. I bought it through Amazon for about $70. Money well spent, it's a masterpiece. The Soviet Union gave Bondarchuk the army to play with. War and Peace is the greatest book I've read and I b..."

A friend of mine here on GR highly recommended this version too. It sounds like it is a mini-series type - which would make sense. I need to order this. I can't say enough about War & Peace and I am excited to see everyone's comments on here!

I can't wait to start. I will be reading in original, so feel free to ask questions about things lost in translation. I hope to contribute as much as I can.

I personally don't see any reason why readers could not skip to the end of the book and read "Part Two". (Laurele, please alert if you disagree about this.)

Part Two is a very interesting statement by Tolstoy of his philosophy of history, and is the only part of the book that I've read.

I became aware of this non-fictional section of the novel through a book by Isiah Berlin, The Hedgehog and the Fox.

Well I don't think so either, Patrice, I agree entirely. But Isaiah Berlin thought it was fairly interesting, apparently.

Anyway, "philosophy" is a little different from one's ideas about history I suppose. "Philosophy of history" is an area of speculation or subjective ideas which is kind of an outlier perhaps.

Ted wrote: "I personally don't see any reason why readers could not skip to the end of the book and read "Part Two". (Laurele, please alert if you disagree about this.)..."

It might be a good idea to open a separate thread to discuss Part Two of the Epilogue, just as we had separate threads on the meaning of myths to go with Ovids' Metamorphoses.

The philosophy of history is an interesting subject, though I suspect that it's too speculative for vigorous and productive discussions.

Ted wrote: "... I am doubtful that I'll be contributing much to the discussion. I have always been a reader of fiction for pleasure, hence am in no way qualified to make comments such as I have seen in many GoodReads discussions about literary aspects of a work of fiction.
"

Reading for pleasure may disqualify you from making comments in some other Goodreads discussions, but most definitely NOT in this group. While we do sometimes discuss literary aspects of a work, we welcome and appreciate, indeed encourage, comments from a wide range of approaches, including "simply" (though there's nothing simple about it) reading for pleasure.

Are there passages you find particularly enjoyable? Tell us so. Are there characters which you find particularly enjoyable or despicable? If so, tell us why. Are there mentions of places or events which you know something about? Share your information. Those are only a few of the many sorts of non-literary aspects of the work we welcome comments on. I certainly don't want to discourage those who do enjoy sharing their thoughts on the literary aspects of the works, but that's only one of many, many ways to enrich the discussion and join in an appreciation (or sometimes non-appreciation) of the work.

Just a reminder in case anybody hasn't looked at them recently: these are the rules for the group. As you can see, they do not include any limits on what sorts of posts are welcome, and they make clear that friendliness and fun are key components of the group.

Rules for our group

1. Disagreement is fine. Disparagement is not. Be positive and friendly.

2. Vigorous, healthy discussion is encouraged. Personal attacks or "put-downs" will not be tolerated.

3. NO SPOILERS. None. Period.

4. Have fun.

Andrea wrote: "I can't wait to start. I will be reading in original, so feel free to ask questions about things lost in translation. I hope to contribute as much as I can."

Fantastic. I love it when we have readers who know the original language of our works. Thanks so much for letting us know this -- we'll try not to overwhelm you!

Ted wrote: "I personally don't see any reason why readers could not skip to the end of the book and read "Part Two". (Laurele, please alert if you disagree about this.)"

Readers can, of course, do whatever they want to with a book, but if you're able to read the whole work with out, I'll be interested in your telling us at the end whether you still feel this way.

Nemo wrote: "The philosophy of history is an interesting subject, though I suspect that it's too speculative for vigorous and productive discussions. "

When has that ever stopped us from trying? [g]

I put on Facebook that we were reading this next and one of my old professors popped up and said that he didn't really like the book. Not enough war for the military historian, apparently. On the other hand, the hour-long battle scene in the movie he loved!

What a stimulating group we have gathering for this book! Ted, I have read parts, but not all, of the Berlin book. I'm also looking over Gary Morson's Hidden in Plain View: Narrative and Creative Potentials in 'War and Peace.' Probably, as Patrice suggests, we should concentrate on the story as it unfolds, but any clues you can give us as to Tolstoy's theories of history, etc., as we move along will be greatly appreciated. And I think those who want to read the theoretical part as a preface to their reading will do fine--as in choice of translation, it's just a matter of your personal style.

I'm working on the schedule--trying to figure out how to make it clear to those reading the various translations. On August 21-28 we shall discuss Part One: 1805. This book takes us from a soirée in Petersburg to A departure from Bleak Hills. The last paragraph, in Maude, reads, "Gone? That's all right!" Said he; and looking angrily at the unconscious little princess, he shook his head reproving lay and slammed the door."

I'm trying to finish editing a friend's book on twenty-five years in Brazil as a missionary. I think I can get most of this done by tomorrow, and then I'll leap in like a fox. Meanwhile, keep the ideas coming, everyone. If any of you have an idea of some aspect of the book that you'd like to specialize in to the benefit of us all--a character, ideas, the historical setting, the battles, the geographical setting--jump in and tell us of your special interest.

The Hedgehog and the Fox: An Essay on Tolstoy's View of History
Hidden in Plain View: Narrative and Creative Potentials in �War and Peace'

tysephine wrote: "I put on Facebook that we were reading this next and one of my old professors popped up and said that he didn't really like the book. Not enough war for the military historian, apparently. On the o..."

Ask him if interested in joining the discussion? Or maybe not?

Gian wrote: "I started reading a few pages of War & Peace (Briggs's translation) and all I could say is wow. I can't wait to read everyone's thoughts on this book.

A link of possible interest, although I am no..."

Great radio program, Gian! http://voiceofrussia.com/radio_broadc...

I would suggest listening to the first half now in order to get an idea of the scope of this great book. I really like the references to Homer and to the idea of the multiple facets of the book and it's varying appeal to different peoples.

One word about the schedule: I plan to divide the first section into two or three parts, so if you can't finish all of Part One as described above by August 21, you'll still be able to begin discussing right away without seeing spoilers.

Laurele wrote: "What a stimulating group we have gathering for this book! Ted, I have read parts, but not all, of the Berlin book. I'm also looking over Gary Morson's Hidden in Plain View: Narrative and Creative ..."

Laurele, I'm glad that you agree that the reading of Part Two would not necessarily decrease a reader's enjoyment. Personally I found it interesting all by itself, with no reference to the novel, but I don't remember enough of it to offer comments.

Anyway such comments would be more appropriate I think in some kind of a separate thread, such as suggested by Nemo. That thread could be pretty interesting for a lot of readers.

I'm very excited to read this book with such an enthusiastic group! I haven't read the book before; my translation is by the Maudes.

Everyman, thanks for the reassurances for those of us who are not equipped to analyze the literary aspects - I'm a public health researcher, so this is just for fun! I can handle favorite scenes and random thoughts, though may leave discussion of the philosophy of history and the like to others. Either way, I look forward to contributing what I can and learning from all of you.

One little uncertainty: I have jury duty on the 20th. Fingers crossed that I don't end up seated on a long trial!

I'm looking forward to be finally tackling this! I'm reading the Maude translation on my kindle.

Also thanks to Laurele and everyone else who has posted all the links and extra info - will definitely be perusing these as I go through the novel.

Laurele wrote: "I'm working on the schedule--trying to figure out how to make it clear to those reading the various translations. On August 21-28 we shall discuss Part One: 1805. This book takes us from a soirée in Petersburg to A departure from Bleak Hills. The last paragraph, in Maude, reads, "Gone? That's all right!" Said he; and looking angrily at the unconscious little princess, he shook his head reproving lay and slammed the door.""

One option would be to use the Gutenberg edition (the Maude translation), which anyone can access free in their browser in the html edition, or download as text or in almost any e-reader format including Kindle and epub. It should be fairly easy for people to match that text with whatever they're reading. For example, the section you indicated would be, in the Gutenberg Edition, Book 1: 1805, Chapters 1 through 28.

Here's the link to the various available formats:

http://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/2600

One problem with the Modern Library edition, which is the Garnett translation, is that it doesn't have a Table of Contents, but just plunges right in, so it's a challenge to know where you are!

Andrea wrote: "I can't wait to start. I will be reading in original, so feel free to ask questions about things lost in translation. I hope to contribute as much as I can."

I'm interested to know if you have any thoughts on the various English translations, if you have looked at any of them. Does one stand out as closer to the original than the others?

Thomas wrote: "Andrea wrote: "I can't wait to start. I will be reading in original, so feel free to ask questions about things lost in translation. I hope to contribute as much as I can."

I'm interested to know ..."

Sorry, I haven't tried reading W&P in English translation just yet, but maybe there is something I can do for you. I will probably be able to get my hands on a few most popular translations within next couple of days. In that case I will read the first few pages of each, including the original in Russian, and offer you an honest opinion right away. Would that work?

Perfect, Andrea! Spaseeba! (that's about as far as my Russian goes. Oh, and prianiki. Love prianiki...)

Thomas

FWIW a friend who's Russian, reaches Russian literature, and runs a university Russian language program (in NYC) liked Pevear and Volokhonsky. I read it and liked it too.

If you read it any French, and there's a great deal in War and Peace, it leaves the French where it is and translates it in a footnote.

Everyman wrote: "Laurele wrote: "I'm working on the schedule--trying to figure out how to make it clear to those reading the various translations. On August 21-28 we shall discuss Part One: 1805. This book takes us..."

Good, Everyman! We'll use the Gutenberg Maude for scheduling, and then if anyone has any problems, I'll try to help you out.

Bill wrote: "Thomas

FWIW a friend who's Russian, reaches Russian literature, and runs a university Russian language program (in NYC) liked Pevear and Volokhonsky. I read it and liked it too.

If you read it an..."

Thanks, Bill. I liked their Gogol translation quite a bit and so I'm leaning in that direction.

Patrice wrote: "That's the translation that U of Chicago recommends but it drove me crazy! Loved Garnett!"

What about it drove you crazy? One of the articles that Laurel linked suggested that Garnett translated so quickly that she got a bit sloppy, but you're not the first person I've heard who said they love her translation of WAP.

Laurele wrote: "If any of you have an idea of some aspect of the book that you'd like to specialize in to the benefit of us all--a character, ideas, the historical setting, the battles, the geographical setting--jump in and tell us of your special interest...." Bold added.

That's such a great suggestion, Laurele. You did similarly for your group with characters the first (and only) time I read W&P. Tracking a particular character (e.g., Prince Andrey Bolkonsky!) permitted all the others to fall into place. Although he doesn't appear as a character until Part II, I see Kutuzov is mentioned in the very first chapter and might especially appeal to those interested in military history. (As you know, I've not committed to this read, at least not yet. But I will follow and the excitement already does seem infectious.)

I used to like Garnett until I read her translation of Brothers Karamazov. I still remember the strange moment when I wasn't sure whether it was Tolstoy or Dostoevsky that I was reading. They sounded so much alike! Then I realized that it wasn't them, it was Garnett. She subsumed the authors' voices under her own (in the interest of clarity and elegance).

As a reader, I always like the opportunity to converse with authors directly, instead of always having to speak through a middleman. All translators are middlemen, but Garnett imposed herself so much that she made the authors' voices indistinct.

Patrice wrote: "There is genius in the way the movie is made. For instance, the translation itself is brilliant. It took me awhile to catch on but they seamlessly translate the French and Russian into English, ..."

I totally trust you, and can't wait to see it!

Most of you are probably sick of hearing me say this, but Tolstoy is one of the authors I particularly like listening to in one translation while following with another. In my experience, any two I've paired have been close enough to work together, different enough to add nuance to meaning and interpretation.

I do have a sense, however, that sentence structure, and therefore some of the relationships of ideas, is one of the harder aspects to translate faithfully from Russian to English -- not from any knowledge of the language but from comments of others.

Lily wrote: "As you know, I've not committed to this read, at least not yet. "

But you will, won't you? Sure you will. How can you stay away? [g]

Everyman wrote: "But you will, won't you? Sure you will. How can you stay away? [g]"

Give me some space, please, Eman. I promised Laurele to listen for at least half an hour -- she's probably right that I'll be hooked by then. The first time I used P&V for much of the reading, which I liked very much. I don't remember what my audio is; haven't dug it out yet, have some other obligations. But, I do have Delphi Tolstoy with a Maude translation on my Kindle, and, as hinted above, I read the first chapter last night. Amazing what one notices on a second read. So we'll see how things play out. I'll certainly be lurking.

May good progress with those eyes continue.

Lily wrote: "Give me some space, please, Eman."

My apologies.

Everyman wrote: "Lily wrote: "Give me some space, please, Eman."

My apologies."

Not needed. Your words were welcoming and kind.

Patrice wrote: "There is one line that is in both Brothers Karamazov and War and Peace and I had that same moment...who was I reading? Turns out they both got it from Schiller! ;-)"

We're going to have to read Schiller sometime, because he was certainly quoted a lot in some of my favorite books.

Thomas Mann was also crazy for Schiller. He quotes him a few times in the Magic Mountain, if I recall correctly.

Laurele wrote: "We're going to have to read Schiller sometime, because he was certainly quoted a lot in some of my favorite books. "

I don't think we have any Schiller on our bookshelf. What should we add?

Everyman wrote: ". "

I don't think we have any Schiller on our bookshelf. What should we add?"

I did a preceptorial at St. John's (a long time ago) on Schiller's On the Aesthetic Education of Man and Kant's Critique of Judgment. I'm not sure I would recommend either as group reads though. Aesthetic theory gets a bit esoteric.

Maybe Don Carlos? It might make a good interim read, and it might please our opera lovers.

Gian wrote: "I am inclined towards the Aesthetical Essays , particularly the essay On Naive and Sentimental Poetry/On Simple and Sentimental Poetry"

We have Schiller's On the Aesthetic Education of Man on our bookshelf. That might be a good read.

Tolstoy read extensively on aesthetic theories, Schiller among others, whom he considered a follower of Kant. (I'd very much like to see his library in Yasnaya Polyana if I ever visit Russia.)

In his essay What is Art, Tolstoy named Die Räuber (The Robbers) by Schiller as "modern examples of the highest art", along with Victor Hugo's Les Misérables, the novels and stories of Dickens, Dostoevsky's works especially his Memoirs from the House of Death, and Adam Bede by George Eliot, etc.

Of course, Schiller and Rossini gave us The Lone Ranger. Schiller's Don Carlos is wildly unhistorical, as is Verdi's opera based on it, but it surely makes for a good story. And those basses!

I am new to this group. I found your group by linking from Everyman's profile from the Reading the Classics group in which I am also I member.

I am so glad that you are reading W&P. I read it on my own this past winter and enjoyed it very much. I read the P&V translation. I liked that they left the French intact with the footnotes in the back. It was fun for me to dust off my high school French courses and attempt translating them myself. Then I could look them up to test my skills. I was only about 50% accurate and my vocabulary is pretty rusty but it was fun to try.

Anyway I probably won't re-read right now since the book is still pretty fresh in my mind. I do also have the Maudes version on audio which I might listen to. You never know. I look forward to the discussions. I was on my own the first time through and it's great to hear other peoples responses and thoughts.

Catherine wrote: "I am new to this group. I found your group by linking from Everyman's profile from the Reading the Classics group in which I am also I member."

Delighted that you found us. Even if you don't re-read W&P along with us, you probably remember enough to engage in the discussion.